Bachmann made the announcement at a press conference Wednesday, saying, “Last night, the people of Iowa spoke, with a very clear voice, so I have decided to stand aside.”

Mitt Romney got top bragging rights in Tuesday’s Iowa caucuses, edging out opponent Rick Santorum by fewer than 10 votes. Libertarian-leaning Ron Paul secured third place with around 21 percent of the votes, while the rest of the candidates — Newt Gingrich at 13 percent, Rick Perry at 10 percent, and Bachmann at 5 percent — fell much further behind.

Despite his fifth-place finish, Perry seems set to stay in the race, writing on his official Twitter account: “The next leg of the marathon is the Palmetto State. … Here we come South Carolina!!!” The tweet included a photo of Perry in jogging gear, giving a thumbs-up.

Photo: U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn. (Wikimedia Commons/Fibonacci Blue)

From CNN:

Ron Paul finished a close third, according to the state GOP. Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who placed fifth, said late Tuesday that he would return to his home state to consider whether his campaign would continue.

Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, had 30,015 votes. Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania and an upstart challenger who just weeks ago polled in the single digits, had 30,007, the state GOP said.

Each had roughly 25% of the vote in Iowa, the first state to vote in the 2012 presidential caucus and primary season. Paul, a U.S. representative from Texas, had 21%. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was at 13%. Perry was at 10%, Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota had 5%, and former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman had 1%.

State GOP officials said certified results will be released in two weeks.

Because the race was initially too close to call, many candidates spoke to their supporters before the final tally was released.

“Game on,” said Santorum, to a crowd gathered in Johnston, Iowa. “What wins in America are bold ideas, sharp contrasts and a plan that includes everyone. A plan that says we will work together to get America to work.”

Even Romney praised Santorum’s efforts when speaking at his celebration party. “This has been a great victory for him and for his effort,” Romney said of Santorum. “He’s worked very hard in Iowa. We also feel it’s been a great victory for us here.”

The focus of the race will now shift to New Hampshire, which holds its primary on Tues., Jan. 10.

Photo: 2012 GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney (Flickr/Gage Skidmore)

Vander Plaats’ endorsement of Santorum was not a surprise to LGBT advocacy groups; both men have a history of making inflammatory statements against the LGBT community.

“Today’s endorsement of Rick Santorum by Bob Vander Plaats comes as no surprise,” One Iowa Executive Director Troy Price said in a statement. “Both Santorum and Vander Plaats have all built their careers attacking loving and committed gay and lesbian couples, and the fact is that Vander Plaats caved to the extreme social conservative agenda. With poll numbers lagging, it is clear Rick Santorum does not have a chance against President Obama in November, and Vander Plaats has endorsed a losing candidate.”

Vander Plaats drew the ire of many Iowans earlier this year when his group released a “marriage vow” for Republican presidential hopefuls that suggested that children were better off under slavery than they are under President Obama. After significant criticism, that language was removed.

But the vow, which Santorum signed, also likened homosexuality to polygamy, adultery, and polyandry; called gays and lesbians a public health risk; and asserted that homosexuality is a choice.

Price said that Vander Plaats’ endorsement of Santorum shows he is out of step with popular opinion regarding LGBT issues.

“Today’s announcement proves what we have known all along,” he said. “Bob Vander Plaats is out of touch with what voters want. What Iowans care about are jobs and the economy, and they deserve a candidate who does too.”

Vander Plaats’ action during the 2012 campaign has led some Republicans to criticize his tactics.

Iowa House Speaker Pro-Tem Jeff Kaufmann sent Vander Plaats a scathing email in July, which read, in part: “Guys your integrity is in question and your political credibility is waning to the point of no impact,” he wrote.

Santorum and Vander Plaats have both called for reduced federal spending, yet both have played a crucial role in funneling millions of taxpayer dollars to conservative Christian outfits that support their agenda of opposing equal rights for LGBT people.

Vander Plaats’ Family Leader got $2.2 million in federal money for the Marriage Matters program between 2006 and 2010.

As a U.S. senator, Santorum was instrumental in securing $3.1 million for conservative Christian groups in Pennsylvania, including the Urban Family Council, a Philadelphia-based group headed by William Devlin.

Devlin’s group supports laws criminalizing gays and lesbians. He told the Advocate in 2003, that he is “one of those folk who believes the government should be in our bedrooms.” He also filed suit to prevent domestic-partner benefits from taking effect in Philadelphia and has vociferously supported a proposed amendment to the Pennsylvania Constitution barring same-sex marriage.

In endorsing Santorum, Vander Plaats told reporters: “Our fear all along is that the conservatives would fragment their votes. In our assessment, we believe Rick Santorum is the best one to launch out of Iowa. … Hopefully, this gives him a stamp of credibility that some people are waiting for.”

He added: “I believe Rick Santorum comes from us. Not to us. He comes from us. He is one of us.”

Though Santorum is taking the endorsement seriously, Vander Plaats said in July that he doesn’t put much weight to endorsements.

In addition to Vander Plaats, Chuck Hurley of the Iowa Family Policy Center also endorsed Santorum. The IFPC is a division of Vander Plaats’ Family Leader.

Photo: Rick Santorum (ricksantorum.com)

The movie, which premiered last week in Des Moines, promotes a strategy of pursuing federal legislation that would grant civil rights to fetuses, on the grounds that their equal protection rights are protected by the Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment, an idea championed by current presidential contender Newt Gingrich.

In a recent article, two physicians argue that the film is problematic because, in medicine, physicians must learn to separate their personal feelings from those of their patients.

Via ReligionDispatches.com:

Dr. Anthony Levatino, interviewed at length in the film, is an OB/GYN who formerly performed abortions. Levatino and his wife had fertility problems and were seeking to adopt a child; at one point he describes his regret as he was performing a first trimester abortion while he and his wife were undertaking that process. They eventually adopted a child who was later tragically killed after being hit by a car. Levatino describes a second trimester abortion he performed after the death of his daughter, after which he concludes about his patient, “I didn’t see her wonderful right to choose and I didn’t see what a great doctor I was helping her with her problem pregnancy.”

The Gift of Life draws on Levatino’s personal tragedy to portray his decision to stop performing abortions as a policy answer, rather than an individual, understandable response to grief. Dr. Daniel Grossman, senior associate at Ibis Reproductive Health, told me, “It is true that abortion providers often have conflicting feelings about the work we do.” But, he went on, “most of us have those feelings and are able to separate our personal feelings from those of our patients and what they need and want to do with their current pregnancy.”

Dr. Douglas Laube, Board Chair of Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health, echoed this view, describing Levatino’s reaction as “normal” given his circumstances, but noting that his patient’s reaction was not discussed. “I see it as a disconnect,” said Laube. “It does not connect logically with a reason not to support the right to choose. It’s his feelings versus her right to choose.”

Laube goes on to argue that the film peddles several abortion falsehoods, such as a claim that all fetuses feel pain and that abortion providers attempt to maximize the number of abortion procedures they perform, in order to profit from them:

The anti-choice activist Carol Everett claims she once worked for an abortion provider that aimed to perform three to five abortions on 13-18 year old girls so they would be accustomed to using abortion as a birth control method into adulthood. Dr. Laube called these claims “pure nonsense,” “pure fiction,” and “really a stretch.” He noted that abortion comprises 3-5% of Planned Parenthood’s budget, and that abortion is “certainly not a money-maker. At best, it’s a break-even.”

The fetal personhood movement, which aims to define life from the moment of conception, has swept the country in recent years. Personhood initiatives have cropped up in many states — most notably in Mississippi, where a personhood amendment was recently rejected by voters despite support from state policy-makers. In Florida, personhood organizers have told The Florida Independent that they are currently working toward placing an amendment on the state’s 2014 ballot.

In an interview conducted last month, Laube told the Independent that attempts to define human life from the moment of conception “flies in the face of common sense” and could have “wide-reaching impact to access to women’s health: cancer treatment, fertility treatment, birth control.”

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (FLORIDA INDEPENDENT/ Cooper Levey-Baker) 

GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich (Photo: Wikimedia Commons/Gage Skidmore)

Mother Jones reports that presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has received an endorsement from former Rep. Fred Grandy, R-Iowa, an anti-Islam activist.

Via Tim Murphy at Mother Jones:

Since leaving the House, Grandy has reinvented himself as an anti-Islam activist, delivering dire warnings of the threat of what he calls “galloping Shariah” law. At a tea party event in Maryland in October, Grandy warned that Occupy Wall Street was being propped up by the Council American Islamic Relations—which, according to Grandy, is in turn a front for the Muslim Brotherhood. Is #OWS part of an Islamist plot to take over the United States? In the eyes of Gingrich’s newest endorser it is.

Grandy’s pet issue is the perceived creep of Islamic law into American courts—in October, he wrote that there had been “attempts in 23 states to use shariah law either in trial or appellate cases.” After losing his job as a talk radio host in March (in part because his wife, who co-hosted the show, had warned that the government had been infiltrated by “Shariah-compliant” officials), Grandy embarked on a ”Shariah Awareness Tour,” culminating in a  appearance at the national Constitution or Sharia Conference in Nashville last month.

Grandy is not the only anti-Islam activist claiming the Muslim brotherhood is behind the Occupy Wall Street movement. Tom Trento, a Florida-based activist and ally of U.S. Senate candidate Adam Hasner, claimed his team found what it considered evidence that Occupy Orlando is part of a “move by a Muslim activist to take over control of ‘Occupy Orlando,’ in the ‘spirit of the Arab Spring.’”

On Election Day 2011, when Mississippians voted down the “personhood” amendment that would have criminalized abortion and, potentially, common forms of birth control, the political arm of Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) launched the Women Are Watching (WAW) campaign, a social-media project intended to educate and engage Planned Parenthood supporters throughout the country.

According to a press release, the Planned Parenthood Action Fund (PPAF) will run online banner ads highlighting “Champs” and “Chumps” of reproductive rights.

Current “Chumps” featured include GOP presidential candidates Mitt Romney and Texas Gov. Rick Perry, as well as U.S. Reps. Steve King (R-Iowa), Allen West (R-Fla.), Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) and Todd Akin (R-Mo.). “Champs” include President Obama, U.S. Sens. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.); and U.S. Reps. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.); and former Iowa First Lady Christie Vilsack, who is running for Congress as a Democrat.

In an editorial for the Huffington Post published Tuesday, PPFA President Cecil Richards wrote:

Over the past year, we have witnessed the most aggressive legislative attacks on women’s health and rights in a generation. The 2010 elections dramatically changed the U.S. Congress and state legislatures nationwide, leading to a wave of efforts to restrict access to vital women’s health care, including lifesaving cancer screenings and birth control. … [M]ore than 1,000 reproductive health bills have been introduced in legislatures across the country, the majority of which seek to undermine women’s health.

These attacks on women’s health are unacceptable and we’re putting anti-women’s health candidates from both parties on notice. Women Are Watchingwill work to ensure that politicians who play politics with our health are defeated and to support candidates who fight for the care women need to stay healthy.

Planned Parenthood saw victory Tuesday night with Mississippi’s “personhood” rejection and with Democratic victories in Kentucky (Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear was re-elected), Iowa (Democrats retained control of the state Senate) and New Jersey (Democratic control expanded in the state Senate).

However, Virginia is now completely controlled by the Republican Party, which won seats in the already GOP-majority House of Delegates and appears to have tipped the balance of power in the state Senate from Democrat to Republican, with the election of Republican Bryce Reeves over incumbent Sen. R. Edward Houck of District 17. The national anti-abortion-rights group the Susan B. Anthony List claims to have spent $25,000 in radio, TV and mailer ads against Houck’s reelection.

Planned Parenthood is also watching various states in 2012, including:

• Pennsylvania: Bills have been introduced to enforce new regulations on abortion clinics and to require women to receive state-mandated information about abortion.

• Florida: In 2012, Floridians will vote on a ballot initiative that would amend the state constitution to prohibit public funding of abortions, which is already illegal, but more significantly the bill would “prohibit the State Constitution from being interpreted to create broader rights to an abortion than those contained in the United States Constitution” — thus rolling back a constitutional privacy right in the state constitution that currently provides more protection for women than the U.S. Constitution does. A “personhood” amendment just like Mississippi’s will also be on the ballot.

• Planned Parenthood is also “watching” New Hampshire, which severed a decades-long family-planning contract with Planned Parenthood of Northern New England this year; Ohio, which introduced the controversial “heartbeat bill;” and Texas, which slashed the state’s family-planning budget from $111 million to $38 million and passed a mandatory ultrasound bill (many of the provisions of this law were struck down by a federal judge).

Both governors cited a need to better protect citizens’ homes, businesses and farms through flood control as their key reasons for leaving the regional interstate organization (PDF), which is comprised of 28 tribes and eight states to “facilitate management of the natural resources of the Missouri River Basin including water resources, fish and wildlife and consideration of the impacts to the economic, historical, cultural and social resources among the basin states, tribes and the federal government.”

In a letter dated Nov. 3 Branstad wrote that he no longer “believe[s] that MoRAST is the best avenue to purse Iowa’s interest and priorities.”

The governors of the Missouri River have formed a Missouri River Working Group which has met twice to discuss the importance of elevating the focus on flood control in the management of the Missouri River. These meetings have provided an opportunity to directly interact with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, other states and relevant federal partners to pursue solutions to the flooding challenges facing our respective states. … I am encouraged by these high-level discussions and remain committed to actively participating in these important discussions about Missouri River management and the recovery work ahead. …

At the recent MoRAST meeting in Rapids City, S.D., MoRAST was not responsive to the perspectives of some states, including Iowa. While seven of the eight Missouri River governors have called for a heightened focus on flood control, MoRAST did not actively pursue this goal at the recent meeting. Moreover, there have been long-standing concerns that MoRAST’s by-laws are too narrowly constrained to adequately represent the diversity of key stakeholders and multiple uses of the river. …

Branstad concluded by writing that “impacted Iowans deserve a fresh approach to Missouri River management.”

Likewise, Heineman indicated that his state’s best interests were better served “by alternate forms of discussion and engagement,” like those happening as a part of the newly formed Missouri River Working Group.

States have seen the need for improvement in education, the opinion reads, and so have pushed forward with Core Curriculum State Standards.

“It is why our two states — along with more than 40 others — developed and adopted the Common Core State Standards in the past two years. It is also why — irrespective of what may or may not be happening in Washington — we are pushing ahead with implementation of these standards,” the op-ed reads.

Branstad set a campaign goal of making Iowa first in the nation for education, and is pushing to change the way students are evaluated and teachers are paid in the state. He’s called for the creation of a tiered pay system for teachers and end-of-course exams for high school students, among other things.

The New Hampshire primary is particularly important for Johnson’s long-shot candidacy. He is pro-abortion rights, supports marriage equality and marijuana legalization, positions that make him anathema to Iowa’s social conservative caucus voters. His campaign has counted on performing well in New Hampshire, which is known for its libertarian bent.

In his most recent debate performance, Johnson gained brief national attention for joking that his neighbor’s dogs have created more shovel-ready jobs than President Obama. He also repeatedly touted his proposal for a balanced budget amendment, no doubt in the hope that Republican voters would respond more to his fiscal conservatism than to his social liberalism.

According to Democracy in Action, Johnson has spent more time in New Hampshire than any other GOP presidential candidate, a total of 18 visits and 70 days total. His presence in the state has eclipsed even fellow former Gov. Jon Huntsman (Utah), another candidate distrusted by social conservatives who has spent a total of 42 days in New Hampshire.

The New York Times’ Michael Shear notes that had the early winter storm predicted for the East Coast this weekend “swept in 24 hours earlier, Mr. Johnson might have found himself out of luck.”

The IDP’s statement came as Walker visited West Des Moines on Wednesday for a fundraising dinner benefiting the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank located in Washington, D.C. Branstad attended the event.

Walker gained national attention earlier this year when he pushed a bill stripping some collective bargaining rights for public workers and requiring them to pay more for health insurance, among other things.

IDP Chairwoman Sue Dvorksy said Walker “brings a familiar anti-worker agenda that is nearly identical to that of Governor Terry Branstad.”

“While Scott Walker’s attack on working men and women in his state drew national attention, Governor Branstad and Iowa Republicans were pushing their own anti-worker bill. If passed, it would have ended decades of important protections for workers across the state,” Dvorsky said. “Throughout his career, Governor Branstad has failed to support working men and women across this state, just as Scott Walker is doing in his.”

But Branstad called the IDP’s statements “an unfair and inappropriate characterization,” and said both he and Walker are trying to deal with tough state budgets.

“He, like me and a lot of other governors, inherited a real financial mess and is making tough decisions to try to get his state on the right track, and I think the people of Wisconsin can make their judgment on their governor,” Branstad said. “And I feel confident to stand for the people of Iowa and point out what we’re doing in the state of Iowa to bring more business and jobs and to increase opportunities for workers in this state.”

Democrats in Wisconsin have undertaken an effort to recall Walker. In an e-mail to supporters on Wednesday, former U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin) said Walker “has torn our state apart.” Feingold is founder of Progressives United, a 501(c)4 organization.

“Since taking office in January, Scott Walker has attacked the rights of Wisconsin workers, passed an undemocratic voter ID bill, and done the bidding of the Koch brothers and his deep-pocketed corporate backers at every turn,” Feingold wrote.

Feingold asked for donations to help recall Walker, saying he’s “governed so extremely and so recklessly, going right at the throat of working people when our families are suffering, that we have no choice.”

“Enough is enough. The people of Wisconsin can’t afford four full years of Scott Walker as our governor — and it’s time for us to recall him,” he said.

About 100 people gathered outside the Sheraton Hotel where Walker was speaking to express their displeasure with him, Branstad, and what they see as a nationwide attack on workers’ rights.

The Heritage Foundation event was closed to the media, but a video is expected to be available online on Thursday.